madras

Mort said they had a 5 yr plan when they took over, its not looking too good if this is the situation we find ourselves in almost 2 years into the plan If they are now embarking on a new 5 year plan now then surely having a 62 year old manager with a history of health problems was not a good start!! Surely it needed a young manager to see the yr plan through. I think we can only resign ourselves to the idea that they are either clueless or couldn't care less. Sad business. But change will come it always does. or even that they had a 5 year plan but have miscalculated. dull but more realistic.

yes but it starts afresh every year Otherwise in 2013 they would have to go to the Chronicle and tell them we have a 1 year plan pretty sure the "5 year plan" is just an attempt to cash in on the contempt for capitalism at the moment.

yes but it starts afresh every year

oh yes there was. (panto voice)

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others in the other, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. madras's prudency ?...MADRAS'S PRUDENCY ? (in a brian blessed type voice) i have no problem with taking on debt and taking a risk.............they done it and failed which leads me to............. i think they ran up more debt than was sustainable (or at least more than it was safe to add to). answer the darn question. as a couple of others have alredy pointed out it seems that he has answered it in his own way, but its not ok for ashley to be undertaking a period of modest re-building because he's just starting out and has no track record we can judge his intentions on, whereas the previous owners did, so it would have been ok for them to do it. only half of what i am getting at as ne5 never seems to have understood the position fred left us in let alone ashleys actions since taking over of which even i am critical of some.

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others in the other, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. madras's prudency ?...MADRAS'S PRUDENCY ? (in a brian blessed type voice) i have no problem with taking on debt and taking a risk.............they done it and failed which leads me to............. i think they ran up more debt than was sustainable (or at least more than it was safe to add to). answer the darn question.

You're SO my kinda woman I'm no-man's type of woman, it takes a man with balls of steel to put up with me, Whats that your holding in your hand her ex-es.

I might even eat my pie caveman style and ensure it is visible around the corners of my mouth up to the sides of my cheeks NUSC Not Understanding the Supporting Concept i might get a pint,pour it out,then get another.

What? In your boxers? well it would definitly provocate

i may go as an agent prevocathingy

No doubt you have proof to back that claim up? No, I thought not. You know what you have said. You'll disappear even if I did find some of the things you've said, just like when you gave me the toonarama link yourself that proved you wrong about Gordon Lee mackems.gif the quotes in my sig are proof enough of your personality agenda and cluelessness. i'd like to think i'm the only one without a personality based agenda then. praised fred when he was doing well. criticised him when he stopped doing well and wanted his removal when i thought he was too far gone to change things. but you are unrealistic about decisions. You think they should pay the price for appointing Souness and Roeder, well they have, but you keep going on about it ? Whats your point now ? You got what you wanted, so has it worked out for the best or not ? not just those decisions but the financial mess they left aswell. has it worked out for the best ? i think we probably aren't any worse off than if fred had stayed. i could see allardyce releagting us and if we hadn't the banks would be pulling the plug on further credit by now. the fact that i was willing to give ashley a go shows how far beyond bringing us back i thought fred was for all he had done previously. now.........

No doubt you have proof to back that claim up? No, I thought not. You know what you have said. You'll disappear even if I did find some of the things you've said, just like when you gave me the toonarama link yourself that proved you wrong about Gordon Lee mackems.gif the quotes in my sig are proof enough of your personality agenda and cluelessness. i'd like to think i'm the only one without a personality based agenda then. praised fred when he was doing well. criticised him when he stopped doing well and wanted his removal when i thought he was too far gone to change things.

Just out of interest, if he does reply by pm then let us know in here although you don't have to post his answer. the man with the biggest personality agenda on the board preaches on about integrity and standards. I didn't have the slightest intention of replying by pm, I'll do it on an open board, rather than you harp on about it in your "secret section". bet you don't I just did and i don't believe that answer you gave is an answer to this question that you claim to have answered................

Just out of interest, if he does reply by pm then let us know in here although you don't have to post his answer. the man with the biggest personality agenda on the board preaches on about integrity and standards. I didn't have the slightest intention of replying by pm, I'll do it on an open board, rather than you harp on about it in your "secret section". bet you don't I just did so you do expect them to keep racking up more and more debt year on year until either success or bankruptcy. why didn't you say earlier. it would have saved a lot of bother. cheers.

Just out of interest, if he does reply by pm then let us know in here although you don't have to post his answer. the man with the biggest personality agenda on the board preaches on about integrity and standards. I didn't have the slightest intention of replying by pm, I'll do it on an open board, rather than you harp on about it in your "secret section". bet you don't

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please" I understand what you and the others are saying. You wish we hadnt' played in the Champions League rather than aim for a relegation and solvency, and you think every club except us is successful, always appoint the right man, and make profits at the same time oh we know that trick,the one where you try to make out someone said something they didn't. what i am saying (and you well know it) is that after dropping out the champs league you can gamble a bit to get back in,but if you fail and you keep on gambling and failing.....you end up like all other gamblers who fail. still awaiting your answer by the way of where the money would come from year on year when making losses year on year and do you understand that you can't keep borrowing for ever.

which other clubs ? just it seems like most have pulled the reins right in and we were in a worse position to begin with.

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please"

It's posts like this that make me laugh. Everything they say is bollocks except the JFK craic eh? Do you really think Llambias is going to come out and say, "erm roight we fink Jawou iz a bit ov awright, ba ee aynt got a cloo abaat nuffink, and we're looking to get rid asap" He's their appointment, and they're merely showing their appreciation for him taking on the job. Joe Kinnear will not be NUFC manager beyond the end of this season. Of this I am confident. If he is installed as a permanent manager, I will turn on them personally just like everyone else. Omg you honestly don't see the issue with this here? The mere fact that JFK was offered a long term contract is the problem. His results so far has been average at best and that is being generous. They have clearly no ambition if they believe him or someone of his caliber is the man for the job. We might as well go and appoint Souness or Roeder again. It's that level of ambition. What I am trying to say is that it could all be a ploy to show the world that they don't change managers like they change socks, and that they are willing to commit to an employee they believe in. This could be to encourage future incumbents who may hesitate to apply for the job in the summer when it is vacant, without having any concerns about the board's desire to establish stability. For the record, I do NOT think keeping JK is a good idea, and I suspect Ashley and co also realize that we could do much better! You have heard from 2 sources confirming there is a contract and Mike Ashley being interviewed saying Kinnear is his hero. Everyone in football knows that Kinnear was always going to be a short term solution so i don't buy into your argument that they are putting out quotes to make it seem we are stable. They believe Kinnear is a good idea because they all have a good working relationship, it certainly isn't based on football results. That is my take on it. relax,it doesn't matter. i have it from a higher source that getting a manager to get results is a lottery anyway.

Everything will be fine mate if it comes off. They've gambled on retaining our Premier League status this season without spending much on players or management. Having a financially sound club is what I think everyone wants, but right now it looks like a dodgy bet that's all. got to agree with t'dave there

They are probably not anti-Ashley enough for NE5, who has already given 3 years money to Mike Ashley cos he hates him that much! unlike you, who only supports/supported the team when they were winning ie under the Halls and Shepherd. I take it that you were pro-Halls and shepherd then, or did you stop going when we suffered this "mediocrity" that you speak of ? i didn't realise you weren't allowed to say "such and such is doing well" then a few years later say "hey those people who were doing well aren't doing so well now"

maybe because of the way NUSC came into being it will take time for it "mature" a bit. an independent fans movement that carries some weight could well be a good thing but not on the idea of "get rid of the owner with no plan for what happens after that" type platform.

won't it be spanish tele's pictures rather than ITV sending an entire crew over for the match ?

i'm sure freddy shepherd did once claim he was putting his personal cash into the club. technically he was but he was just buying more shares.

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams. it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account. Well, lets put it another way. Appointing a manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, is quite worthy of having a good chance, as is an up and coming manager who won the FA Cup and left his team in the top 3 of the league and 2nd phase of the Champions League. As is appointing a World Cup winner. What is your thoughts on Scolari being sacked or are you sticking to your previous criteria and claim Abramovic should step down for taking the club backwards ? BEWARE...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT. i thought scolari was an ok appointment but his lack of league experience anywhere was going to be a risk.......can you find many who thought souness or roeder were decent appointments ? if chelsea were a business and they made huge losses and that weren't affordable and appointed souness i think that yes, i'd be looking for someone to take over from whoever was running the club.......straight enough of an answer for you ? give it a go you may feel cleansed. oh remember i backed the dalglish appointment and thought they got rid of him too early (don't want you confusing me with someone else) There was a lot of people on here who defended and supported everything Souness did, and you know it. how many supported his original appointment. ever heard of the maxim...he might be s*** but he's our s*** ? you may hope he succeeds, but its totally different to harping on for months about how he was doing the right things because Alex Ferguson did, and he was getting it right etc etc blah blah, rather than saying he was getting it all wrong. Are you pissed btw ? You seem quite angry i haven't had a drink all week but i'm pissed off from the bobbing and weaving and the "lottery" was the final straw really. the most annoying thing is that i believe you know full well the situation the club was in spring 2007 but won't accept it to save face on here.